Dill v. Commissioner of the Social Security Administration

Filing
19

ORDER RULING ON 13 REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION For the reasons articulated by the magistrate judge, the decision of the Commissioner is hereby reversed under sentence four of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g) and remanded to the Commissioner for further action consistent with the findings in the Report and Recommendation. Signed by Honorable Patrick Michael Duffy on 02/12/2018. (egra, )

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF SOUTH CAROLINA
Daniel Edward Dill,
Plaintiff,
vs.
Nancy A. Berryhill,
Commissioner of Social Security,
Defendant.
) C.A. #4:16-3949-PMD
)
)
)
)
ORDER
)
)
)
)
)
)
This social security case is before the Court upon the magistrate judge's recommendation that
the decision of the Commissioner of the Social Security Administration be reversed with a remand
of the cause to the Commissioner. The record includes a report and recommendation of the United
States Magistrate Judge made in accordance with this Court's Order of Reference and 28 U.S.C. §
636(b)(1)(B).
This Court is charged with conducting a de novo review of any portion of the magistrate
judge's report to which a specific objection is registered, and may accept, reject, or modify in whole
or in part, the recommendations contained in that report. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). However, absent
prompt objection by a dissatisfied party, it appears that Congress did not intend for the district court
to review the factual and legal conclusions of the magistrate judge. Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140
(1985). Additionally, any party who fails to file timely, written objections to the magistrate judge's
report pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1) waives the right to raise those objections at the appellate
court level. United States v. Schronce, 727 F.2d 91 (4th Cir. 1984). No objections have been filed
to the magistrate judge's report.1
A review of the record indicates that the magistrate judge's report accurately summarizes this
1
Defendant filed a Notice of Not Filing Objections on February 8, 2018.
case and the applicable law. Accordingly, the magistrate judge's report is incorporated into this
Order. For the reasons articulated by the magistrate judge, the decision of the Commissioner is
hereby reversed under sentence four of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g) and remanded to the Commissioner
for further action consistent with the findings in the Report and Recommendation, and
AND IT IS SO ORDERED.
February 12, 2018
Charleston, South Carolina
2

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.